ProfWag wrote:If it were done "in the interest of research," why has he never released his findings to another scientific committe or peer reviewed journal on this or any other test he has done?

I'm not Dr. Sudhir Shah so how would i know? But you're obviously referring to the 2003 tests. The 2010 tests were performed in April, so it's yet to be seen when and if there will be a published paper. But as I said, this was done with the Indian Ministry of Defence, specifically the Defence Institute of Physiology and Allied Science (DIPAS). So the question remains, why would the Indian Ministry of Defence, DIPAS, 35 doctors, and officials in the Indian Government be perpetrating a hoax? To promote a religion? That might be considered more of a stretch than Prahlad Jani's claim to have not had a bite or a sip for 70 years; He has nothing to lose, others do.

But obviously this was done in the interest of research on the limits of the human body, that's precisely what DIPAS does. I was researching the housing market in my area earlier and i have yet to publish my findings or sumbit them to peer review.

And what does "this or any other test" mean? Just the two tests relating to Prahlad Jani, is that what you meant? Because Sudhir Shah has certainly presented plenty of his other neurological work to peer-reviewed journals.

The alternative theory to the "everyone is lying for little reason" argument is that Prahlad Jani has managed to trick the Indian MoD, a pile of doctors, and Gov't officials, a feat which, in and of itself, should be of interest. Which is why I asked the question in the first place.

I am aware of 3 tests of which he has not submitted his findings for scientific scruitiny. 2003 Jani, 2010 Jani (it's been almost 3 months, yet nothing), and Hira Ratan Manek. There may be more but that's enough to put a question mark in my head. You keep mentioning all of these doctors whom he was tested by, yet none of them have released anything, nor has the IMD. Additionally, for the testing conditions to be considered valid, he would have had to have been monitored continuously for the entire time. He was not. There were periods when he was not visible to the camera and he was allowed to have guests. Those two issues alone means the test does not impress me. I can't answer why someone would lie or overlook such important information concerning this claim. In fact, I'm not even saying anyone lied as I don't have the evidence for that, but I am saying the testing conditions did not stand up to fool-proof protocol. Finally, submitting the results of a test that could change the course of human events for peer review and presenting your findings of a housing market are not quite the same, wouldn't you say?

ProfWag wrote:You keep mentioning all of these doctors whom he was tested by, yet none of them have released anything

The links have already been posted in this thread to what they have released.

ProfWag wrote:Additionally, for the testing conditions to be considered valid, he would have had to have been monitored continuously for the entire time. He was not. There were periods when he was not visible to the camera and he was allowed to have guests.

Two independent ethics committees monitoring the experiment disagree with you and say he was under continuous observation.

LMAO! How can one have video that contradicts he was being observed? There are not many things that are 100% impossible, but your statement is. Congrats.

Then you obviously didn't watch the video that shows he was not always visible to the camera, but that's okay, I'm not a big fan of videos either. However, you presented the argument that he was under continuous observation (I'm assuming you meant CCTV). The video clearly shows he was out of range of the cameras. Additionally, the question could be asked why the videos were not available to independent observers such as you and I. In today's day and age, a video hook-up on the internet is quite easy to do, especially for such as important experiment. However, the entire video from either 2003 or 2010 have not been made public. Is that not a fair question to ask?

Wilhelm wrote:LMAO! How can one have video that contradicts he was being observed? There are not many things that are 100% impossible, but your statement is. Congrats.

Then you obviously didn't watch the video that shows he was not always visible to the camera, but that's okay, I'm not a big fan of videos either.

Then you obviously didn't read my post, or understand it, but that's ok. I don't know what makes it obvious to you that I didn't watch the video. Because I know the definition of observation? Ok, I'm sure many things are "obvious" in your world.

You claim to not be calling anyone a liar, but your position requires it. When his head wasn't on camera, there were human beings there. Observing him. And that video is really funny, in that it's obviously meant to deceive. It says that NO independent observers were there in 2003. I wonder why it singles out that year. Because there were independent observers there in 2010. (It attempts to decieve in other much more blatant ways, which I'll cover in a sec)

So I have evidence that Sanal﻿﻿ Edamaruku is attempting to scam people. Now he needs evidence that that Jani, Dr. Shah, 35 doctors, independent observers (ethics committees), and the Indian MoD are attempting to scam people. I'd actually like to see it, it would make it much easier for me to form an opinion on the subject.

ProfWag wrote:However, you presented the argument that he was under continuous observation

I didn't present that argument, two independent ethics committees did.

ProfWag wrote: (I'm assuming you meant CCTV).

I have no idea what would make you assume that.

ProfWag wrote:The video clearly shows he was out of range of the cameras.

Since, perhaps, you're attempting to deceive, that is incorrect. His head was blocked from the camera by other human beings. What's really astonishing is that in the video you posted, it claims to show him walking out of range of the camera "to get a bite to eat" or something, yet they never show him even close to going out of range. It's the most blatant deception possible, yet you believe it. Interesting.

ProfWag wrote:Additionally, the question could be asked why the videos were not available to independent observers such as you and I. In today's day and age, a video hook-up on the internet is quite easy to do, especially for such as important experiment. However, the entire video from either 2003 or 2010 have not been made public. Is that not a fair question to ask?

It isn't a reality show, it's a scientific experiment being conducted at a Defense research facility.

I didn't realize you had watched him on camera for 360 hours...Bottom line, this individual was blocked from view of the camera. You cannot conclusively show he was not fed or given water. It's really as simple as that wilhelm. Again, I'm not saying this person didn't eat or drink for 15 days, all I'm saying is there are questions surrounding the examination period.

ProfWag wrote:I didn't realize you had watched him on camera for 360 hours...

Don't try to twist it. it would have to be you implying that you watched him on camera the whole time, not me. I don't know, but you claim that you do. Since the video you posted is clearly meant to deceive people, there must be some other video which you've seen. 360 hours of it? Have you?

ProfWag wrote:Bottom line, this individual was blocked from view of the camera. You cannot conclusively show he was not fed or given water. It's really as simple as that wilhelm. Again, I'm not saying this person didn't eat or drink for 15 days, all I'm saying is there are questions surrounding the examination period.

Exactly, you are saying that they are all lying, or that they are all being tricked by Jani.

And I'm not saying he did or didn't either. I have no clue, but I would like to see some evidence either way. The stuff provided by Sanal﻿﻿ Edamaruku is certainly not going to cut it. Edamaruku has given clear evidence that he is trying to scam people. He's a nut and a liar, and there's proof of the latter.

This would be easy if it was just Dr. Sudhir Shah and Prahlad Jani; I'd put my money on it being shady, and probably bullshit, and leave it at that. The problem is all the other doctors, two ethics committees and the IMD. Now I need evidence of a hoax, or something. But the extent to which Sanal﻿﻿ Edamaruku - who seems to be the main guy trying to debunk this - is blatantly trying to deceive people, makes Jani's and Dr. Shah's claims to appear more legit. I mean, if their number one detractor has to lie and misrepresent things, that's a huge problem.

There have always been people claiming not to have eaten or drank for x amount of years; Christian mystics, too, not just the Jains. As far as I'm aware, no one has ever tried to investigate it scientifically until now. It's frustrating that it's being done under the aegis of some defense dept., because I'd like to see exactly what they've come up with.

Bottom line is that there's clear evidence that Sanal﻿﻿ Edamaruku - the main debunker, here - is lying. There is no evidence, as of yet, that Jani, a bunch of doctors, 2 ethics committees and the IMD are lying. Trust me, I'd like to see some.

Wilhelm wrote:The stuff provided by Sanal﻿﻿ Edamaruku is certainly not going to cut it. Edamaruku has given clear evidence that he is trying to scam people. He's a nut and a liar, and there's proof of the latter.

I'm rather busy at work today, so if you've already provided this info I apologize, but what proof is it you have that Edamaruku is lying?

Wilhelm wrote: There is no evidence, as of yet, that Jani, a bunch of doctors, 2 ethics committees and the IMD are lying. Trust me, I'd like to see some.

By the way, you do know there really only needs to be 2 people to be involved in a deception like this, don't you? The doctors, ethics committees, etc. can state what they saw was Jani didn't eat or drink for 15 days. Doesn't mean he didn't.See David Blaine in a block of ice for a similar claim of extraordinary human endourance.

Wilhelm wrote:The stuff provided by Sanal﻿﻿ Edamaruku is certainly not going to cut it. Edamaruku has given clear evidence that he is trying to scam people. He's a nut and a liar, and there's proof of the latter.

I'm rather busy at work today, so if you've already provided this info I apologize, but what proof is it you have that Edamaruku is lying?

it's good to know that we're both goofing off at work.

In the video you posted, the text on the screen at one point reads that there was no independent observation in 2003. That's certainly meant to decieve because there was, indeed, independent observation in 2010.

But the big lie comes at the part where he's trying to show that Jani went off camera. Two clips are shown; One clip showing Jani and another individual walking toward what would would be out of the cameras range, and a second clip showing Jani walking back toward his bed. In both clips, Jani is never shown anywhere near out of range of the camera. I have no idea whether Jani actually walked out of the cameras range, and those clips don't show it. When he is in his bed, he is pretty much at the far left corner, toward the top of the screen, and in the clips where Edamaruku claims he is going off camera, the first one cuts out when he is right in the middle of the shot, walking toward the bottom right, or thereabouts, and the second one cuts in when he is right in the middle of the shot, walking back toward the bed. It's moronic.

ProfWag wrote:

Wilhelm wrote: There is no evidence, as of yet, that Jani, a bunch of doctors, 2 ethics committees and the IMD are lying. Trust me, I'd like to see some.

By the way, you do know there really only needs to be 2 people to be involved in a deception like this, don't you? The doctors, ethics committees, etc. can state what they saw was Jani didn't eat or drink for 15 days. Doesn't mean he didn't.

Yeah, I already pointed that out when I said that either they are all lying or they were all fooled. But I posted the comment you quoted in conjuction with the fact that there is already proof that the debunker is definitely lying. Context.

Wilhelm wrote:People need to bear in mind that these tests involved India's Ministry of Defence and were done in the interest of research concerning the limits of the human body. What do they have to gain by hoaxing this? And how did this guy dupe the 35 doctors monitoring the experiment?

Are you seriously entertaining the idea that this fellow can fore go any and all sustenance and do this for 65 years ?

Wilhelm wrote:People need to bear in mind that these tests involved India's Ministry of Defence and were done in the interest of research concerning the limits of the human body. What do they have to gain by hoaxing this? And how did this guy dupe the 35 doctors monitoring the experiment?

Are you seriously entertaining the idea that this fellow can fore go any and all sustenance and do this for 65 years ?

Reading comprehension. it's a sad state of affairs that your so many of your posts can be answered like that.

Wilhelm wrote:People need to bear in mind that these tests involved India's Ministry of Defence and were done in the interest of research concerning the limits of the human body. What do they have to gain by hoaxing this? And how did this guy dupe the 35 doctors monitoring the experiment?

Are you seriously entertaining the idea that this fellow can fore go any and all sustenance and do this for 65 years ?

Reading comprehension. it's a sad state of affairs that your so many of your posts can be answered like that.

I had drawn the same conclusion as really?, really. I also did quite well throughout graduate school in reading comprehension...not that matters at all to Scepcop who says you only use 1% of what you learn in school...

Wilhelm wrote:People need to bear in mind that these tests involved India's Ministry of Defence and were done in the interest of research concerning the limits of the human body. What do they have to gain by hoaxing this? And how did this guy dupe the 35 doctors monitoring the experiment?

Are you seriously entertaining the idea that this fellow can fore go any and all sustenance and do this for 65 years ?

Reading comprehension. it's a sad state of affairs that your so many of your posts can be answered like that.

Right now you are haggling over details. I just want you to state your position with clarity as to whether you believe this fellow or any other human can live without any sustenance. Please state your position clearly.